Re: [addr-select-dt] next step

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Tue, 14 September 2010 18:47 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@innovationslab.net>
X-Original-To: addr-select-dt@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: addr-select-dt@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4ADA3A6AED for <addr-select-dt@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:47:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CNRqsTf9fVJ3 for <addr-select-dt@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:47:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD5A3A6ADE for <addr-select-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:47:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach.fuaim.com [206.197.161.141]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09BB688215; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clemson.local (c-69-143-255-99.hsd1.md.comcast.net [69.143.255.99]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9084513698DC; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:48:21 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4C8FC373.5010404@innovationslab.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:48:19 -0400
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100825 Thunderbird/3.1.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: addr-select-dt@ietf.org
References: <D6CE49D0-6BF0-488E-B4AD-F28BFE2DEE98@nttv6.net>
In-Reply-To: <D6CE49D0-6BF0-488E-B4AD-F28BFE2DEE98@nttv6.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [addr-select-dt] next step
X-BeenThere: addr-select-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPv6 Address Selection Design Team <addr-select-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/addr-select-dt>, <mailto:addr-select-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/addr-select-dt>
List-Post: <mailto:addr-select-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:addr-select-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/addr-select-dt>, <mailto:addr-select-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 18:47:56 -0000

Arifumi & DT,

On 9/9/10 6:30 AM, Arifumi Matsumoto wrote:
> DT members,
> 
> the Beijing meeting is approaching now. We have to think about
> the next step for us.
> 
> As we have reached consensus within this design team, I think
> the next step should be going out to 6man wg. If so, it may be
> better to declare the conclusion of this design team.
> 
> What do you think about this ?
> Do you have in mind any other item to be discussed here in this
> design team ?

I believe we have reached a point of completion for the design team with
the publication of the address selection considerations draft.  What Bob
& I would like to see now is a draft proposing the actual changes to RFC
3484.  This should be driven by the issues raised in
draft-ietf-6man-rfc3484-revise.  It would be encouraging to see such a
draft published soon so that it can be discussed on the mailing list and
possibly revised prior to the Beijing meeting.

Regards,
Brian